CCE v. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd.

204 ELT 517Supreme Court of India2006#8877 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Judgments citing CCE v. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd.

CIPLA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-1(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1219/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalecipla Ltd., Vs. Dcit Cc-1(12) Cipla House, Peninsula 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Business Park, Gk Bldg, Mk Road, Mark, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400 013 Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc1450B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. J.D. Mistry. Ar Respondent By : Shri. V. Sreekar. Dr Shri. Sanjay Sethi. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -47, Mumbai, Order Passed U/S 148 R.W.S 147 & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri. J.D. Mistry. ARFor Respondent: Shri. V. Sreekar. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…tates that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still can the courts place a construction on such instruction so as to make it retrospective. In this context, the apex court in the case of CCE v. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd. reported in [2006] 204 ELT 517 (SC) : [2007] 8 RC 1, dealing with the question how a beneficial circular is to be construed, has approached this question in the following manner. At paragraph 13 of the judgment, it is stated that the learned counsel further submitted that the circular being oppressive and against the respondent, has to apply only prospectively and cannot be ap…

DCIT 9(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. FUTURA VALUE RETAIL LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 6705/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6705/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Acit-9(3)(2), M/S. Future Value 418, 4Th Floor, Retail Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Knowledge House, V. Mumbai-400020 Shyam Nagar, Off Jogeshwari Vikhroli Link Road, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai-400060 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaecp3041P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. Sushil Kumar Poddar (Dr) Assessee By: Ms. Dinkle Hariya सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.07.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 6705/Mum/2016, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 23.08.2016, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16,Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”) In Ita No. Cit(A)/ I.T.305/Dcit-9(3)(2)/2015-16, For Assessment Year 2012-13, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 29.03.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2012-13. I.T.A. No.6705/Mum/2016

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariyaFor Respondent: Shri. Sushil Kumar Poddar (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194HSection 194JSection 40

…he said policy 28 | P a g e I.T.A. No.6705/Mum/2016 is prospective, still can the Courts place a construction on such instruction so as to make it retrospective. In this context, the Apex Court in the case of CCE v. Mysore Electrical Industries Ltd., [2006] 204 ELT 517 (SC) dealing with the question how a beneficial circular is to be construed, has approached this question in the following manner. At paragraph 13 of the judgment, it is stated that the learned Counsel further submitted that the circular being oppressive and against the respondent, has to apply only prospectively and cannot be applied retrospecti…

DCIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ARISTO PHARMACEUTICALS P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5747/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita No.5553/Mum/2014 M/S Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Asst.Cit-2(1) 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mercantile Chambers, बिधम/ Mumbai- 400020 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaaca4495N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Ita No.5167/Mum/2015 Dcit-2(1)(1), M/S Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 561, Mercantile Chambers, बिधम/ 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg, M.K. Road, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai- 400020 Mumbai-400 001 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaaca4495N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Kumar Rastogi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena &
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…tates that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still can the courts place a construction on such instruction so as to make it retrospective. In this context, the apex court in the case of CCE v. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd. reported in [2006] 204 ELT 517 (SC) : [2007] 8 RC 1, dealing with the question how a beneficial circular is to be construed, has approached this question in the following manner. At paragraph 13 of the judgment, it is stated that the learned counsel further submitted that the circular being oppressive and against the respondent, has to apply only prospectively and cannot be ap…

ACIT 2(1), MUMBAI vs. ARISTO PHARMACEUTICALS P. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6129/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita No.5553/Mum/2014 M/S Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Asst.Cit-2(1) 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mercantile Chambers, बिधम/ Mumbai- 400020 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaaca4495N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Ita No.5167/Mum/2015 Dcit-2(1)(1), M/S Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 561, Mercantile Chambers, बिधम/ 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg, M.K. Road, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai- 400020 Mumbai-400 001 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaaca4495N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Kumar Rastogi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena &
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…tates that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still can the courts place a construction on such instruction so as to make it retrospective. In this context, the apex court in the case of CCE v. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd. reported in [2006] 204 ELT 517 (SC) : [2007] 8 RC 1, dealing with the question how a beneficial circular is to be construed, has approached this question in the following manner. At paragraph 13 of the judgment, it is stated that the learned counsel further submitted that the circular being oppressive and against the respondent, has to apply only prospectively and cannot be ap…

ARISTO PHARMACEUTICALS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 2(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5553/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita No.5553/Mum/2014 M/S Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Asst.Cit-2(1) 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mercantile Chambers, बिधम/ Mumbai- 400020 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaaca4495N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Ita No.5167/Mum/2015 Dcit-2(1)(1), M/S Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 561, Mercantile Chambers, बिधम/ 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg, M.K. Road, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai- 400020 Mumbai-400 001 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaaca4495N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Kumar Rastogi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena &
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…tates that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still can the courts place a construction on such instruction so as to make it retrospective. In this context, the apex court in the case of CCE v. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd. reported in [2006] 204 ELT 517 (SC) : [2007] 8 RC 1, dealing with the question how a beneficial circular is to be construed, has approached this question in the following manner. At paragraph 13 of the judgment, it is stated that the learned counsel further submitted that the circular being oppressive and against the respondent, has to apply only prospectively and cannot be ap…

ARISTO PHARMACEUTICALS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6680/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita No.5553/Mum/2014 M/S Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Asst.Cit-2(1) 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mercantile Chambers, बिधम/ Mumbai- 400020 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaaca4495N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Ita No.5167/Mum/2015 Dcit-2(1)(1), M/S Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 561, Mercantile Chambers, बिधम/ 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg, M.K. Road, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai- 400020 Mumbai-400 001 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaaca4495N (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Kumar Rastogi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena &
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…tates that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still can the courts place a construction on such instruction so as to make it retrospective. In this context, the apex court in the case of CCE v. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd. reported in [2006] 204 ELT 517 (SC) : [2007] 8 RC 1, dealing with the question how a beneficial circular is to be construed, has approached this question in the following manner. At paragraph 13 of the judgment, it is stated that the learned counsel further submitted that the circular being oppressive and against the respondent, has to apply only prospectively and cannot be ap…

CCE v. Mysore Electricals Industries Ltd. (204 ELT 517) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax